Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Face masks effectively limit the probability of SARS-CoV-2 transmission

science.sciencemag.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 387 posts

Re: Face masks effectively limit the probability of SARS-CoV-2 transmission

#101

Post by XorNot »

petertodd wrote: post #56
kickopotomus wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, a few of my friends fell victim to the Qanon conspiracy bandwagon and the fact that mask pore size is wider than the virus was heavily circulated as a reason for mask ineffectiveness.

That wasn't a Quanon conspiracy: that was misunderstanding that I saw plenty of mainstream doctors and other health professionals promote. What it showed is that either they were intentionally lying - which I kinda doubt - or that they were so confident in what they had heard that they never bothered to do any research for themselves. Just reading the relevant wikipedia pages carefully would have corrected that misun…

This is your not frequent enough reminder that "doctor" is not a synonym for "scientist", or more specifically epidemiologist.

Medical doctor's are basically mechanic's for the human body. The human body is complex, so this is a high bar to clear and an important function, but it doesn't magically grant them knowledge about concepts outside that field.

Re: Face masks effectively limit the probability of SARS-CoV-2 transmission

#102

Post by bellyfullofbac »

slver wrote: post #71
sschueller wrote: post #17

N95/FFP2 seem to be very effective. I wish the media and government would have spent more time in educating people in things like how N95 masks work and that it isn't like a coffee filter. Even thought the pores are larger than a virus the masks are statically charged causes smaller things to get trapped. Many people don't know this but probably had an interaction with static electricity sometime in school and would…

Bless your soul, but what I've learned from the way we handled the pandemic worldwide (and are still handling it) is that information that's readily available and should in theory reach everyone, flows ridiculously slowly, even among specialists and political figures, it's easily corrupted and distorted, and a loud ignorant minority counts as much in the public discourse, as the voices of millions of reasonable peopl…

Yeah, it's disappointing to see how I still see people wearing their masks incorrectly, e.g. just over the mouth and not covering their noses.

Sometimes I think human beings are advanced, but then I walk into a public toilet and I see evidence how many are still no better than animals. It's a simple technology, urinate into the hole where the water can wash it away and we'll remain hygienic, but a lot of people still fail at that.

Re: Face masks effectively limit the probability of SARS-CoV-2 transmission

#103

Post by BugsJustFindMe »

rsj_hn wrote: post #75
tgsovlerkhgsel wrote: post #39

This entire study seems to be centered around a theoretical, mathematical model, and I didn't see any attempt to actually validate that model. Basically, the authors seem to assume that the virus behaves according to their formulas, and show that under their assumptions, face masks work, but don't actually prove that their assumptions match reality - or did I miss something?

Indeed this is the money paragraph: "The effectiveness of masks, however, is still under debate. Compared to N95/FFP2 respirators which have very low particle penetration rates (around ~5%), surgical and similar masks exhibit higher and more variable penetration rates (around ~30-70%) (2, 3). Given the large number of particles emitted upon respiration and especially upon sneezing or coughing (4), the number of respi…

The mistake that many people make, and that I think you're implicitly making here too, is this notion of "controlled study". If the study denies the result seen time and again in real life, perhaps the study isn't studying correctly.

Re: Face masks effectively limit the probability of SARS-CoV-2 transmission

#105

Post by mhb »

mulmen wrote: post #72
mhb wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think people need to know how they work. They just need to know that those are what doctors wear and that they are very, very effective. And much better than a mask you make from ad hoc materials. Once N95 masks became readily available and cheap, it was (and is) mysterious why people weren't being told to wear them to protect themselves instead of wearing whatever was at hand to sort of protect themselves an…

If you tell me how something works and it fits within my mental model of the world then I will trust you. I will add this information to my mental model of the world. If you tell me something works but can't explain how I will consider if the claim is worth evaluating then attempt to understand it myself before accepting it. If you tell me to trust you with no explanation I will immediately distrust you.

That's reasonable and also what I would like. But what is the mental model of someone wearing their mask alone in the woods or in their car?

So, yes, we should explain why an N95 is better than a handkerchief, but it seems like there are plenty of people who don't care about the details and just need to be told that one is more effective.

Re: Face masks effectively limit the probability of SARS-CoV-2 transmission

#106

Post by makomk »

slashdot2008 wrote: post #69
petertodd wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A big part of why they are annoying and uncomfortable is the lack of one-way valves to make it easier to breath in them. In industry, when you actually need to wear a mask/respirator, they almost always have valves. Unfortunately, we got stuck on the "wear masks to protect others" narrative, and people who actually were at risk were prevented from wearing much more effective, much more comfortable, masks that would a…

I don't think it is an unfortunate narrative. two people wearing masks without valves is twice the reduction in likelihood that either one gives the other covid. If someone does have covid the mask without the valve will greatly reduce the concentration of virus particles in the air around them. I think that is working as intended!

With the typical masks available to and worn by ordinary people, exhalation pressure seems to cause a lot of air to bypass the mask too - except that instead of doing it via a well-designed valve that redirects the airflow somewhere sensible, it blows out the top and steams up glasses or out the sides and towards whoever's standing behind you.

Re: Face masks effectively limit the probability of SARS-CoV-2 transmission

#107

Post by XorNot »

neither_color wrote: post #28
splitrocket wrote: post #3

Not that this will settle anything. Anecdotally, I've not gotten even a slight cold while being socially distanced while consistently masked.

Anecdotally I haven't had a cold in years. I work out 4 days a week and while I wouldn't call it a strict diet I have an upper limit calorie "budget" that I never exceed. While it's certainly possible that masks helped some people avoid all airborne transmissions last year, lots of people were also able to exercise more and make better food choices without the rush of breakfast and lunch commutes.

I made absolutely no changes 1 year, but because my workspace at work was in an alcove next to an air conditioning vent that pulled air from the outside, I completely dodged the office cold because I basically had my own positive pressure environment.

It's more likely your lifestyle is simply keeping you away from people and places that experience high levels of foot traffic.

Re: Face masks effectively limit the probability of SARS-CoV-2 transmission

#108

Post by jayd16 »

joshuaengler wrote: post #74

The VAST majority of mask wearing I have seen in California has been average cloth-covers. I have only seen a handful of people out of thousands actually wearing N95 masks, so perhaps N95 is highly effective at stopping viruses, but I see basically nobody wearing that. Stores, offices, buildings, all are completely fine with you wearing a bandana over your face. There is effectively no point in even mandating mask la…

Is there some global increase in lung issues (besides covid) or bacterial infections or something?

Re: Face masks effectively limit the probability of SARS-CoV-2 transmission

#110

Post by DanBC »

mhb wrote: post #60
sschueller wrote: post #17

N95/FFP2 seem to be very effective. I wish the media and government would have spent more time in educating people in things like how N95 masks work and that it isn't like a coffee filter. Even thought the pores are larger than a virus the masks are statically charged causes smaller things to get trapped. Many people don't know this but probably had an interaction with static electricity sometime in school and would…

I don't think people need to know how they work. They just need to know that those are what doctors wear and that they are very, very effective. And much better than a mask you make from ad hoc materials. Once N95 masks became readily available and cheap, it was (and is) mysterious why people weren't being told to wear them to protect themselves instead of wearing whatever was at hand to sort of protect themselves an…

> Once N95 masks became readily available and cheap, it was (and is) mysterious why people weren't being told to wear them

Because they're difficult to wear. There are a bunch of photos on social media of HCPs who've got bruised faces after correctly wearing N95 / FPP3 for a day or two.

Post reply on HN